A British Airco D.H. 2 destroys a German observation balloon but has paid for it. The aircraft has also been destroyed by a German anti-aircraft gun called a "flaming onion" which was a 37 mm revolving-barrel anti-aircraft gun used by the German army during World War I, the name referring to both the gun, and especially the flares it fired. The term could also be applied to any sort of anti-aircraft fire that used a visible tracer.

The actual weapon was a Gatling type, smooth bore, short barreled automatic revolver called a 'lichtspucker' (light spitter) that was designed to fire flares at low velocity in rapid sequence across a battle area. This gun had five barrels and could launch a 37 mm artillery shell about five thousand feet (1500 m). To maximize the chance of a strike, all five rounds were discharged as rapidly as possible, giving the 'string of flaming onions' effect. Because most other rounds were fired slowly due to the nature of anti-aircraft artillery at the time, this gun's rapid rate of fire left many fliers thinking that the rounds were attached to a string and they feared being shredded by it.

Credits: The aircraft, balloon and groundwork is based on a flight from Rise of Flight, the sky is from my collections of mayyang.com skies. All editing done with GIMP. Thanks for Looking.

The aircraft is from "Rise of Flight" which is flown into a position that I liked. Then I tear up the aircraft to a painted Background. This particular composition was one of my longest works but was fun to do.

I got the nationality wrong (I've since read another book that features a Canadian WWI pilot called "Three Cheers for Me" by Donald Jack); the pilot I was referring to was Lt Frank Luke, and he was American with the AEF, second only to Eddie Rickenbacker in the number of aircraft he shot down. He is best known for his ability to down balloons, which is why he saw so much AA.

Yes, there are more than one school of thought as to how he died exactly, but it's well documented that he had more than once sworn he would never be taken prisoner, and he used his service weapon to fire on the German troops who found him. According to Wikipedia, the bullet that killed him was from a ground based machine gun that hit him while he was flying.

I am still amazed that the Brtish did not issue parachutes to their pilots. How many could have been saved?

Also it was not until 1917 that they improved on the armament. The early years they relied on small caliber bullets piercing holes in the balloon then maybe the tracers would ignite the hydrogen gas. In 1917 the incinderary .45 caliber bullet was introdued. The French also developed rockets in 1918 and were banned after the war.

The early aircraft were light and fragile because the engines were developing slowly as far as increase in horsepower. The Spad was a heavy plane that could take punishment but it had a powwerful engine for its day.

The P-47 was a perfect example of a heavy well protected aircraft with a powerful engine that was noted for survivability yet fast,

Sorry to butt in, but I can't help but try to imagine the emotion that would have been felt by the aircrew, on seeing those in the balloons use parachutes, while knowing full well that they had none themselves.

The British did not issue parachutes because they were considered an unnescessary extra weight.

Unofficially the reason was given in a report by British Air Board that was not published at the time: "It is the opinion of the board that the presence of such an apparatus might impair the fighting spirit of pilots and cause them to abandon machines which might otherwise be capable of returning to base for repair." However, the Royal Flying Corps did decide to use them to drop Allied spies behind enemy lines.

Pilots such as Major Mick Mannock became increasingly angry about the decision to deny British pilots the right to use parachutes. He pointed out that by 1917 they were being used by pilots in the German Airforce, French Army Air Service and the United States Air Service Instead of carrying parachutes, RFC pilots carried revolvers instead. As Mannock explained, unable to carry a parachute, he had a revolver "to finish myself as soon as I see the first signs of flames." Ultimately Mannock would go down in flames.

Thank You, When I read about those "flaming onions" I knew I had to do an aircraft being blown out of the sky. This was risky business by the aviators and the odds were stacked against them on "balloon busting".

The danger involved in attacking balloons was immense. The balloon ground parimeter was surrounded by AA and machine guns. Unlike normal AA fire directed at a passing plane that had to estimate altitude, AA fire protecting a balloon knew your altitude (same as the balloon plus a bit more) and could put up a lethal curtain of fire that you had to fly through.

If you got through the high explosive AA then you were probably low enough to attract ground fire from machine guns and rifles. Very dangerous, probably more so than the HE.

Finally there was the fighter cover. If you attacked the balloon you exposed you rear end to enemy fighters and effectively handed them an altitude advantage to go along with it. Also very dangerous.

Of the (76) balloons aces, during WW I 30% were killed, captured or wounded.

Perhaps a couple, but I think there would have been surprisingly few. Don't forget, the RFC lost an awful lot of pilots in take-off or landing accidents, and for those who died in combat, many would have been too low to use a parachute anyway, or would probably have been disabled from using theirs due to injuries sustained during their dogfights or encounters with enemy artillery.

And of course, even if they had managed to use their parachute - the unlucky ones who would have had to use them close to, or over the frontlines would probably have bought the farm anyway, either by being shot at by the opposing side, or by being unlucky enough to land in no-man's land...

Perhaps the parachutes might have been able to save one in five or one in ten, but certainly not much more.

And don't forget, of course, that the 'cumbersome' concern did have some validity in the beginning! Many aircraft designs of the time were barely powerful enough with all of the necessary hardware crammed in, so adding the weight of a parachute (15-20 kg per person) might have detracted even more from a marginal performance, enough to have a severe impact on the manoeuverability or speed, certainly in the case of some of the fighter designs. In the case of a Camel, for instance, a parachute would have accounted for about 9% of its payload, and in the case of a DH.9, 5%.

Not to mention that these early parachutes weren't as efficient or reliable as the ones we are used to - something the pilots of the Luftstreitkräfte found out to their cost...

Still, even if only a tenth of the RFC's losses could have been saved, that would still account to about 950 men...